Sexual stimulation devices of the prior art include dildos that have vibratory elements such as disclosed in U.S. Application Publication Nos. 2009/0234182 to Buchholz, 2008/0306417 to Imboden et al., 2007/0106109 to Ly and 2005/0033112 to Bruton et al. It is also known to provide accurate deformation of a prosthetic device such as a dildo as disclosed in U.S. Application Publication No. 2006/0069329. Another class of dildos avoids vibratory and other powered forms of stimulation, relying primarily on the shape of a rigid or semi-rigid device, such as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 2005/0004429 to Tracanna, U.S. Pat. No. 6,533,718 to Ritchie et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,853,362 to Jacobs and U.S. Application Publication No. 2005/0033112 to Bruton et al. Materials disclosed as suitable for these devices include wood, metal, plastic, rubber, wax, glass, stone and composite material. However it is believed that none of this class of devices of the prior art has proven entirely satisfactory, for a variety of reasons. For example, currently known colored outer coatings for Pyrex glass are believed to be toxic, requiring an additional outer layer of glass to be added, thereby significantly increasing the cost to manufacture. Also, the use of metal plating as described in United States Patent Application No. 2011/0021870 to Lee, have the disadvantage of potentially exfoliating from the underlying surface after repeated use and washing diminishing the visual appeal of the device and potentially introducing toxins to the user. Additionally, making any intricate patterns using metal coatings requires repeated application of metals that may not adhere to one another, and require potentially toxic glue or varnish that, disadvantageously, can be absorbed from the device into the user.
Therefore, there is a need for a sexual stimulation device in the form of a dildo that provides improved appearance and decorative features as compared with existing devices.